How High King Torygg was Slain (part deux) : V

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:40 pm

Well, just before the last thread was locked for post limit, I had typed up a long response to a great post by L33ty.

*ahem* If you would all be so kind as to get back on topic, I would like to discuss whether the Empire intervening in Skyrim's rite of succession was justified considering the circumstances, or if the Stormcloaks are right in accusing the Empire of corrupting Nord politics and infringing on their traditions.

If the Imperials had just let (made) the Nords hold a moot after Ulfric killed Torygg, instead of branding Ulfric a murderer and chasing him out of town, things would have been a lot better. They would have had a vote, Ulfric would have won or lost. If he won, then so be it, the Nords have the right to vote for their high king and the Imperials have no business interfering with that.

If he had lost and started his civil war (or if Ulfric had refused to participate in the moot and started his civil war), then Ulfric could have been branded an outlaw for not following Nord custom.

The biggest mistake the Imperials made was chasing Ulfric out of town and preventing a moot. That was percieved as trampling on Nord customs and served to galvonize "true Nords" behind Ulfric.

The Imperials must have thought Ulfric would have won the moot, but the outcome was far from clear since so many Jarls across Skyrim have Imperials coin in their pockets. Even Balgruuf does not support Ulfric. The Imperials should have just followed Nord law and held a moot. I don't see how the Imperials were "justified" in preventing Skyrim from following the lawful Nord process for selecting a new leader.

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:57 pm

If it came down to it, I don't think Ulfric and his closest supporters would accept a moot that didn't name him king even if the imperial Nords had allowed it. He would consider it tainted by imperial influence. Ulfric hints at this in his "damn the moot" speech with Galmar. There are times when a country is just ripe for war and there's no other way to settle things than by the sword, because people have lost faith in institutions. It's not pretty but it's what it is.

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 3:44 pm

If it came down to it, I don't think Ulfric and his closest supporters would accept a moot that didn't name him king even if the imperial Nords had allowed it. He would consider it tainted by imperial influence. Ulfric hints at this in his "damn the moot" speech with Galmar. There are times when a country is just ripe for war and there's no other way to settle things than by the sword, because people have lost faith in institutions. It's not pretty but it's what it is.

Agreed. I doubt losing the moot would've stopped him(Unless the one who won turned out to be for secession too), but his claim would've lost some of its legitimacy.

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 10:37 pm

If it came down to it, I don't think Ulfric and his closest supporters would accept a moot that didn't name him king even if the imperial Nords had allowed it. He would consider it tainted by imperial influence. Ulfric hints at this in his "damn the moot" speech with Galmar. There are times when a country is just ripe for war and there's no other way to settle things than by the sword, because people have lost faith in institutions. It's not pretty but it's what it is.

Agreed. I doubt losing the moot would've stopped him(Unless the one who won turned out to be for secession too), but his claim would've lost some of its legitimacy.

Yep. That's my point. If Ulfric refused to participate in a moot or live by the choice made at the moot, it would have taken away much of his legitimacy. At most he could have complained that the election was rigged by Imperial coin in the pockets of the other Jarls, but that just smacks of whining and sour graqes, not the qualities you want in a leader. The Empire made a big mistake by stopping the Nords from holding a moot because that gave Ulfric legitimacy and made the Empire the lawbreakers, at least in the eyes of a lot of Nords.

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 10:03 pm

hence why both sides replace the jarls so that when the moot comes, the ones both sides replaced will vote in their favor.

» Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:38 pm

Yep. That's my point. If Ulfric refused to participate in a moot or live by the choice made at the moot, it would have taken away much of his legitimacy. At most he could have complained that the election was rigged by Imperial coin in the pockets of the other Jarls, but that just smacks of whining and sour graqes, not the qualities you want in a leader. The Empire made a big mistake by stopping the Nords from holding a moot because that gave Ulfric legitimacy and made the Empire the lawbreakers, at least in the eyes of a lot of Nords.

Ok, I see what you were trying to say.

The Solitude guard may have just reacted out of shock and anger. It would be natural to want to seize Ulfric at least for an investigation, but Ulfric wasn't about to let that happen after Markarth, and he had the luck to find a sympathetic gate guard. Poor Roggvir. Sometimes situations just get out of control and then they take their course.